Every human being follows a value system which is a combined set of innumerable beliefs, experiences, acquired knowledge, likes-dislikes, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. We start identifying ourselves in these set of values and the society we live in also recognizes with these set. Though this particular value system becomes our identifying outlook, it is prone to change. With changes and fine-tunings in the identifying set of values, our identifying attributes also adapt some movements. That is why when we meet a friend or relative after a long gap of time, we find changes in their behaviour or even in their habits.
Having said so, I very well realize and recognize that I am fully inside this dynamic value system. The surrounding I live in identifies me by the past and present attributes of my personality, habits, emotions, styles of doing things, expressions, and such other things. Among these many attributes, here I am burdened to dwell on the value people give on the truthfulness in their daily practical life. We also know it as integrity, which any civil society undoubtedly recognizes as a positive character trait of any person. Absence of it is not taken well in society and is considered bad with which one wants to stay clear of.
Though all of us know that, by nature, we are at peace only when we are truthful to ourselves first, then in dealing with others in the society, its presence and practice around us is clearly seen to be in a receding mode. We see this pitiable trend percolated through all strata of our political, social, professional, moral and family lives. Largely in political and professional areas, we find people taking pride in circumventing the truth of any matter in such a clever way that their action looks well within the jurisdiction of established and accepted truth. We witness this melodrama enacted in courtrooms more than frequently. The renowned political player Winston Churchill wanted the world to accept that truthfulness is not necessary in politics by declaring that “politics is a dirty game”. As he had been a strongman of the world power during the second World War, everybody swallowed his thoughts without making use of their conscience. If we care to listen to our inner voice and consider the social and ethical conscience nature has bestowed to each one of us by default, this declaration is not true in its core. Politics by its original definition is neither dirty nor a game. But being blinded by the arrogance of power, the dirty dacoit politicians have turned it into a trapping and hunting game. As power is addictive, once in power, they make use of all their authority to accumulate more power, so that they can be so dirty strong in their position that no one can replace them. The very politicians have distorted the meaning of politics and the lazy populace of the society have gullibly accepted the wrong connotation without making any effort to verify it. There are many such absurd adages which warrant unbiased analyses and justifiable refutation. But because somebody of some repute said so, a majority of the people in our society has quietly accepted these as sacrosanct truths. One very popular one among such is “everything is fair in love and war”. Really? Why should unfair thing also be considered fair in any situation? Fair and unfair is always so, whatever the prevailing surrounding. In case of an emergency situation, the society might require to bear with some unfair dealings. But that dealing still remains unfair, it does not become fair. Only that the social minded people extend their acceptance and cooperation in that unfair dealing willingly as a service to other members of the society.